Husky Stadium funding dead

Key lawmaker sees no support for $150 million in taxpayer aid

CHRIS MCGAN, Seattle Post-Intelligencer

By CHRIS MCGANN, P-I CAPITOL CORRESPONDENT

Published 10:00 pm, Thursday, January 24, 2008

Students Alex Kummerow of the Seattle Art Institute and Sarah Overland of Seattle Central Community College enjoy the sunset behind Husky Stadium on Thursday from the Washington Park Arboretum.
Photo: Grant M. Haller/Seattle Post-Intelligencer

OLYMPIA -- A University of Washington plan to use $150 million in public funds to help renovate Husky Stadium crashed hard Thursday in the Legislature when lawmakers who were initially open to the idea backed away.

House Speaker Frank Chopp, D-Seattle, said there was no support in his caucus for the proposal, which would have provided tax dollars for half of the $300 million stadium upgrade that the university is seeking. The taxes would have come from extending levies now used to pay for Safeco and Qwest fields.

Chopp said last week that he was open to the idea.

He was an outspoken critic of a request last year by the Seattle Sonics for $300 million to help pay for a new basketball arena in Renton. Chopp said the Husky Stadium proposal was different because it was a public facility.

But asked Thursday if it's fair to say that he doesn't think the UW funding proposal will happen this session, Chopp replied: "That's fair to say."

But UW officials were still holding out hope.

The school's lobbyist, Randy Hodgins, said he doesn't think losing Chopp's support will make selling the stadium funding package any tougher. The lobbying has just begun, and the UW has a lot of information to convey to Olympia lawmakers, he said.

UW Regent Stanley Barer predicted a negative reaction from Chopp at a monthly regents meeting last week. At that time, he urged the rest of the board to consider instead tapping donors to pay for the stadium upgrade.

The regents have discussed selling naming rights to the stadium -- or to the field within it -- as a way to generate revenue, although the board has not publicly considered any offer.

Senate Majority Leader Lisa Brown, D-Spokane, also voiced tentative support last week for the UW proposal. But she downgraded the university's chances in light of public criticism and a deteriorating economic outlook.

"I'm more pessimistic" about the economy, she said Thursday. "Particularly if we are going to be in a period of time of retrenching revenues, it will force people to really focus on the basic things that the state has to fund."

Brown left little wiggle room about the plan's chances.

"It's a little hard to call, but it doesn't seem to be moving rapidly," she said. "I've heard people talk, not negatively about it in terms of is there a need for renovation and safety upgrades, but should athletics take priority over academics. ... It raises a question for me about priorities."

Chopp said Thursday that his statements last week about being open to the idea had been blown out of proportion.

"All I said, at the request of former Governor (Dan) Evans, was that I'd take a look at the proposal," he said.

"I made it clear that we are not talking about state tax dollars for that project because all that would do is take money away from education -- including higher education."

"That's the extent of it," he said. "In fact, since then no House member, and nobody else for that matter in terms of the Legislature, has come to me and asked to support the project. That sends a pretty strong message.

"I just said to Governor Evans that I'd consider it, so I asked people to consider it. Nobody's come to me ask for support for it."

Last week, when asked about the proposal, Chopp said he'd consider it because Husky Stadium "can be used for a lot more than just Husky football," for example high school football games.

"There are several different revenue streams that we are looking at," he said at the time.

This week, Evans told the Seattle P-I editorial board that the school would have to spend $100 million over 10 years to catch up on deferred maintenance on the stadium, but that would leave the public with essentially the same outmoded facility, with a fresh coat of paint.

Asked if the planned upgrade was also part of an effort to match other universities, in order to compete for recruits, Evans said, "We're in nuclear warfare in sports. I don't like it, but how do you get off the train?"

The school said it makes more sense to spend more and actually improve things such as access for people with disabilities, new restrooms, a better press box and seats closer to field.

The current $300 million proposal is scaled back from a $450 million plan, Evans said.

The school has no Plan B if the state refuses to authorize the tax investment, Evans said. What school officials do know is that they would have to spend the $100 million on deferred maintenance no matter what, and that means squeezing the money out of the athletic department.

Potentially, that squeeze would be felt by the minor sports, such as swimming or golf, which are already strapped for revenue.

Asked whether they could appeal to their donors for that money to upgrade the stadium -- donors they were planning to tap for $90 million -- Evans said probably not.

A pitch built around spending to get a snazzy, upgraded Husky Stadium could work, but one proposing just sprucing up an 87-year-old building would be unlikely to have much appeal, he said.